01a_Job Analysis Flashcards
Job analysis
Method for developing criterion measures
e.g. recruitment, selection
Comparable worth
Evaluation technique that ensures equal pay for equal work
*Applied primarily to reduce gender differences
Two main types of Criterion measures:
Objective (direct) measures
Subjective measures
Objective Criterion Measures
Quantitative Measures
e. g Product: Units produced, sold, rejected
e. g Employee: Personal data, accidents, absenteeism, salary
Subjective Criterion Measures
Most frequently used performance assessment
Usually a rating scale
Commonly conducted by immediate supervisor
Characteristics of Self-ratings
Most lenient rating system
Less susceptible to Halo Bias
Peer and supervisor ratings have higher correlation, compared to self-rating with other measures
Which form of subjective measure rating is the most reliable?
Supervisor rating
Peer ratings are particularly good for these two predictions
Training success
Subsequent promotions
Ultimate vs Actual Criterion
Ultimate = Conceptual/theoretical criterion
(like IV)
Actual = the way performance is actually measured
(like dv)
Criterion Relevance
Construct Validity:
Degree to which actual criterion measures the ultimate criterion
Criterion Deficiency
Degree to which actual criterion does not measure all aspects of the ultimate criterion
LImits criterion relevance
*similar to low content validity
Criterion Contamination
When knowledge of employee’s performance on predictor measure affects criterion measure
Artificially inflates predictor’s criterion-related validity
Subjective Criterion Measures:
Two Main Categories
Relative/comparative techniques
Absolute techniques
Subjective Criterion Measures:
Relative/comparative techniques
Performance of two or more employees are compared to each other
Subjective Criterion Measures:
Absolute techniques
Measure of performance without reference or comparison to other employees
Relative Techniques:
Paired Comparison
Each employee is rated with every other employee in pairs on 1+ dimensions of job performance
Disadvantage = cumbersome
Relative Techniques:
Forced Distribution
“Grading on the curve”
Critical Incident Technique
Employees are observed while they work
Ratings of behaviors associated with
outstanding and poor performance
Absolute measures:
Main Benefit of Forced-Choice Rating Scale
Reduces Rater Biases
Absolute measures:
Graphic Rating Scale
Likert-type scale
Highly susceptible to rater biases
Absolute measures:
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS)
Rater chooses one behavior for each dimension that best describes performance
Critical incidents are used to provide employees with specific feedback
Rater biases:
Leniency/Strictness Bias
Rater avoids the middle range of a rating scale
Rates all employees of either high or low
Rater biases:
Central Tendency Bias
Consistent use of Only the middle range of rating scale
Rater Biases:
Halo bias
One-dimension of job performance affects evaluation on other, unrelated dimensions
Best way to improve Rating Accuracy
Provide Raters with adequate training
Frame-of-reference (FOR) Training
Training on specific expectations of effective and ineffective performance on each dimension of rating
Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS):
Benefits
Reduces Rater Biases
Increases Inter-Rater Reliability
True or False?
Biases are increased when Raters rate specific behaviors rather than global behaviors or traits
False
Specific behavior ratings reduce bias
